Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baumeister et al. (De 102022102011 A1) hereinafter, Baumeister.
Regarding claim 1, Baumeister teaches a drive device for an electric bicycle (1), the drive device comprising:
a gearbox having a first drive shaft (30), a second drive shaft (13) and an output element (8), wherein
torque from a first electric motor (6, 7) is couplable into said gearbox via said first drive shaft and torque from a second electric motor (15, 16) is couplable into said gearbox via said second drive shaft (Fig 1);
said output element being configured to dissipate torque from said gearbox (Fig 1);
said first drive shaft and said second drive shafts run parallel to one another (Fig 1); and,
one of said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft being guided through an other one of said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft (30 is guided through 13, Fig 1).
Regarding claim 3, Baumeister teaches that the torques fed in via said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft are transmitted within said gearbox at least in sections on different sides of said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft (above and below the shafts, Fig 1).
Regarding claim 4, Baumeister teaches that said first electric motor coupled to said first drive shaft;
said second electric motor coupled to said second drive shaft;
said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft each defining a longitudinal axis (axis of 2); and,
said first electric motor and said second electric motor being arranged one behind an other in a direction of said longitudinal axes of said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft (Fig 1).
Regarding claim 5, Baumeister teaches that said gearbox is configured for torque transmission from an electric motor (5, 6) coupled to said first drive shaft to said output element in order to drive the electric bicycle with motor assistance (Last four Paragraphs of Page 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2, 14, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baumeister et al. (De 102022102011 A1) in view of Smith et al. (US 2026/0042506 A1) hereinafter, Smith.
Regarding claim 2 and 17, Baumeister teaches a drive device for an electric bicycle (1), the drive device comprising:
a gearbox having a first drive shaft (30), a second drive shaft (13) and an output element (8), wherein
torque from a first electric motor (6, 7) is couplable into said gearbox via said first drive shaft and torque from a second electric motor (15, 16) is couplable into said gearbox via said second drive shaft (Fig 1);
said output element being configured to dissipate torque from said gearbox (Fig 1);
said first drive shaft and said second drive shafts run parallel to one another (Fig 1); and,
one of said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft being guided through an other one of said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft (30 is guided through 13, Fig 1).
However, Baumeister does not teach a bevel gear.
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Smith teaches a gearbox having a bevel gear stage (24) coupled to said first drive shaft (34) and to the output element (32); and,
a bevel gear (30) of said bevel gear stage being coupled to said output element for transmitting torque in at least one rotational direction without a change in rotational speed (Fig 3, Para [0004] and [0026]).
Regarding claim 14, Smith teaches that said gearbox has a further bevel gear stage (38) which is coupled to said second drive shaft; and, said bevel gear stage and said further bevel gear stage are arranged on different sides of said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft (Fig 3 and Para [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Baumeister’s drive device, in view of Smith, with bevel gear. Contrary to flat-planetary arrangements, the bevel planetary gear train provides for more compact placement of the motors. Further, the bevel planetary gear train enables a unity ratio between the bevel sun gear and the bevel ring gear (Para [0004]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-13 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 16 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 6 recites that said gearbox has a pedal shaft that extends transversely or perpendicularly to said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft.
Claim 16 recites that said first drive shaft and said second drive shaft extend parallel to said main direction of extension of the down tube.
Since the prior art (e.g. Baumeister and Smith) teaches drive device that lack said features, the prior art does not anticipate the claimed subject matter.
For illustration purposes, Fig 3 of the examined disclosure shows the shaft arrangements, which is different than the shaft arrangements taught by the prior art of record (Fig. 1 of Baumeister and Fig. 3 of Smith, etc.)
Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to a skilled artisan to have modified the prior art in order to arrive at the claimed invention without resorting to impermissible hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references noted on the attached PTO0892 form teach drive devices of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOSAM SHABARA whose telephone number is (571)272-5495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HOSAM SHABARA/Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights